Tung Lin Wu vs Nicolas Mejia — Little Rock CH Round of 32

Little Rock CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Tung Lin Wu
TPE
Tung Lin Wu
#329ATP
1406ELO
1376Hard ELO
28 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 27 May 2024
hard
Nicolas Mejia
COL
Nicolas Mejia
#133ATP
1477ELO
1424Hard ELO
$142kYTD
$524kCAREER
26 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWWWWLWWWW
Wu T.
6-3 4-6 6-1
Mejia N.
Wu T.
6462
Mejia N.
3611

Tung Lin Wu defeated Nicolas Mejia 6-3 4-6 6-1 in the Little Rock CH round of 32 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Nicolas Mejia came in ranked #133.

Key context

  • Match story: Tung Lin Wu came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–3 4–6 6–1.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Wu T.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Mejia N.

Mejia N.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Wu T.

Even serve battle

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Statistics

This season
Wu T.Mejia N.
1st serve in·Slight edge
68%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
51%
Service points won·Even
63%
62%
Return points won·Even
39%
40%
Break points saved·Even
62%
60%
Aces / match·Even
3.8
3.9
Double faults / match·Slight edge
1.7
2.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (131 vs 156). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Wu T.Mejia N.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
10
26
Break points saved·Slight edge
84
74
Break points won·Even
6
6
Deciding sets·Dominant
6
40
Tiebreaks·Dominant
4
38

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Wu T.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Mejia N.
5.5
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 42 days (−0.7)
Form & Matchup
4.2Hard Elo 1376
Surface ELO
5.8+48 Hard Elo edge
3.7Overall Elo 1406
ELO gap
6.3Overall Elo 1477
10.0No prior meetings
H2H
0.0
5.4
Surface form
6.8
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
9.1
Minutes 14d
9.0
Prev. match
Context
6.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Freshness

Recent load
Wu T.Mejia N.
Freshness·Dominant
80
55

Wu T.: 1 day rest · 1 match, 16 games (7d) · Mejia N.: 2 days rest · 5 matches, 116 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Krueger M.[6]
Shimizu Y.
6-36-4
Semi-finals
Krueger M.[6]
Shelbayh A.[8]
3-66-16-4
Shimizu Y.
Basavareddy N.
7-636-0
Quarter-finals
Krueger M.[6]
Galarneau A.[1]
6-36-1
Shimizu Y.
Quan R.
6-46-3
Shelbayh A.[8]
Holt B.
7-642-67-5
Basavareddy N.
Svajda T.
6-26-2
R16
Shimizu Y.
Tomic B.[5]
6-10-0
Svajda T.
Martin A.
6-47-65
Galarneau A.[1]
Wu T.
6-16-4
Krueger M.[6]
Mayo A.
7-676-3
Holt B.
Hong S.[3]
6-26-3
Shelbayh A.[8]
Williams C.
6-43-66-4
Basavareddy N.
Langmo C.
7-57-5
Quan R.
Andrade A.
6-33-66-3
R32
Shelbayh A.[8]
Bicknell B.
7-646-2
Holt B.
Mukund S.
6-03-66-2
Andrade A.
Wong C.[2]
6-756-46-3
Tomic B.[5]
Kwiatkowski T.
3-66-26-3
Galarneau A.[1]
Moriya H.
6-26-3
Wu T.
Mejia N.
6-34-66-1
Mayo A.
Chappell N.
6-35-77-64
Krueger M.[6]
Draxl L.
6-33-66-4
Hong S.[3]
Cassone M.
6-43-66-2
Williams C.
Takahashi Y.
6-42-66-4
Basavareddy N.
Quinn E.[7]
7-56-4
Langmo C.
Ramanathan R.
7-56-2
Svajda T.
Escobedo E.
6-36-4
Martin A.
Hsu Y.[4]
7-616-2
Shimizu Y.
Smith K.
7-56-3
Quan R.
Kozlov S.
6-17-5